When companies design products a major concern seems to be what the reviewers will have to say about it. For any product of significant value the users are unable to perform any reasonable test before buying, for a casual user some problems may only be apparent after weeks of use so professional reviews are important to many people. The market apparently doesn t want reviews of the form here s a list of products that are quite similar and all do the job well, you can buy any of them, it s no big deal which would be the most technically accurate way of doing it. So the reviewers compare the products on the criteria that are easiest to measure, this lead to phones being compared by how light and thin they are. I think it s often the case that users would be better served by thicker heavier phones that have larger batteries but instead they are being sold phones that have good battery life in a fresh installation but which don t last a day with a full load of apps installed. The latest issue with bad reviews driving poor product design is electric cars. For a while the advocates of old fashioned cars have touted the range of petrol cars which has become an issue for comparing EVs. I have been driving cars for 35 years and so far I have never driven anywhere that s out of range of the current electric charging network, even with the range of the LEAF (which is smaller than many other EVs). If I ever felt the need to drive across the Nullarbor Plain then I could rent a car to do that and the costs of such car rental would be small compared to the money I m saving by driving an EV and also small when compared to the premium I would have to pay for an EV with a larger range. Some of the recent articles I ve seen about EVs have covered vehicles with a battery range over 700Km which is greater than the legal distance a commercial driver can drive without a break. I ve also seen articles about plans to have a small petrol or Diesel motor in an EV to recharge the battery without directly driving the wheels. A 9KW Diesel motor could provide enough electricity on average to keep the charge maintained in a LEAF battery and according to the specs of Diesel generators would take about 55Kg of fuel to provide the charge a LEAF needs to drive 1000Km. The idea of a mostly electric hybrid car that can do 1000Km on one tank of fuel is interesting as a thought experiment but doesn t seem to have much actual use. Apparently a Chinese company is planning to release a car that can do 1400Km one one tank of fuel using such technology which is impressive but not particularly useful. The next issue of unreasonable competition is in charge speed. Charging a car at 2KW from a regular power socket is a real limit to what you can do with a car. It s a limit that hasn t bothered me so far because the most driving I typically do in a week is less than one full charge, so at most I have to charge overnight twice in a week. But if I was going to drive to another city without hiring a car that has better range I d need a fast charger. Most current models of the Nissan LEAF support charging speeds up to 50KW which means fully charging the battery in under an hour (or slightly over an hour for the long range version). If I was to drive from Melbourne to Canberra in my LEAF I d have to charge twice which would be an annoyance at those speeds. There are a variety of EVs that can charge at 100KW and some as high as 350KW. 350KW is enough to fully charge the largest EV batteries in half an hour which seems to be as much as anyone would need. But there are apparently plans for 1MW car chargers which would theoretically be able to charge a Hummer (the EV with the largest battery) in 12 minutes. One obvious part of the solution to EV charging times is to not drive a Hummer! Another thing to note is that batteries can t be charged at a high rate for all charge levels, this is why advertising for fast chargers makes claims like 80% charge in half an hour which definitely doesn t mean 100% charge in 37.5 minutes ! There are significant engineering issues with high power applications. A 1MW cable is not just a bigger version of a regular power cable, there are additional safety issues, user training is required and cooling of the connector is probably required. That s a lot to just get a better number in the table at the end of a review. There is research in progress on the Megawatt Charging System which is designed to charge heavy vehicles (presumably trucks and buses) at up to 3.75MW. Charging a truck at that rate is reasonable as the process of obtaining and maintaining a heavy vehicle license requires a significant amount of effort and some extra training in 3.75MW charging probably doesn t make much difference. A final issue with fast charging is the capacity of the grid. A few years ago I attended a lecture by an electrical engineer who works for the Victorian railway system which was very interesting. The Vic rail power setup involved about 100MW of grid connectivity with special contracts with the grid operators due to the fact that 1MW trains suddenly starting and stopping causes engineering problems that aren t trivial to solve. They were also working on battery packs and super capacitors to deal with regenerative braking and to avoid brownouts in long sections of track. For a medium size petrol station 14 bays for fuelling cars is common. If 6 such petrol stations were replaced with fast charging stations that can charge cars at 1MW each that would draw the same power as the train network for the entire state! There is a need for significant engineering work to allow most cars to be electric no matter how it s done, but we don t need to make that worse just for benchmarks.

For at least 12 years laptops have been defaulting to not having the traditional PC 101 key keyboard function key functionality and instead have had other functions like controlling the volume and have had a key labelled Fn to toggle the functions. It s been a BIOS option to control whether traditional function keys or controls for volume etc are the default and for at least 12 years I ve configured all my laptops to have the traditional function keys as the default. Recently I ve been working in corporate IT and having exposure to many laptops with the default BIOS settings for those keys to change volume etc and no reasonable option for addressing it. This has made me reconsider the options for configuring these things. Here s a page listing the standard uses of function keys [1]. Here is a summary of the relevant part of that page:

• F1 key launches help doesn t seem to get much use. The main help option in practice is Google (I anticipate controversy about this and welcome comments) and all the software vendors are investigating LLM options for help which probably won t involve F1.
• F2 is for renaming files but doesn t get much use. Probably most people who use graphical file managers use the right mouse button for it. I use it when sorting a selection of photos.
• F3 is for launching a search (which is CTRL-F in most programs).
• ALT-F4 is for closing a window which gets some use, although for me the windows I close are web browsers (via CTRL-W) and terminals (via CTRL-D).
• F5 is for reloading a page which is used a lot in web browsers.
• F6 moves the input focus to the URL field of a web browser.
• F8 is for moving a file which in the degenerate case covers the rename functionality of F2.
• F11 is for full-screen mode in browsers which is sometimes handy.

The keys F1, F3, F4, F7, F9, F10, and F12 don t get much use for me and for the people I observe. The F2 and F8 keys aren t useful in most programs, F6 is only really used in web browsers but the web browser counts as most programs nowadays. Here s the description of Thinkpad Fn keys [2]. I use Thinkpads for fun and Dell laptops for work, so it would be nice if they both worked in similar ways but of course they don t. Dell doesn t document how their Fn keys are laid out, but the relevant bit is that F1 to F4 are the same as on Thinkpads which is convenient as they are the ones that are likely to be commonly used and needed in a hurry. I have used the KDE settings on my Thinkpad to map the function F1 to F3 keys to the Fn equivalents which are F1 to mute-audio, F2 for vol-down, and F3 for vol-up to allow using them without holding down the Fn key while having other function keys such as F5 and F6 have their usual GUI functionality. Now I have to could train myself to use F8 in situations where I usually use F2, at least when using a laptop. The only other Fn combinations I use are F5 and F6 for controlling screen brightness, but that s not something I use much. It s annoying that the laptop manufacturers forced me to this. Having a Fn key to get extra functions and not need 101+ keys on a laptop size device is a reasonable design choice. But they could have done away with the PrintScreen key to make space for something else. Also for Thinkpads a touch pad is something that could obviously be removed to gain some extra space as the Trackpoint does all that s needed in that regard.

• [1] https://tinyurl.com/22x67h6z
• [2] https://tinyurl.com/26sj5eoo

There are many negative articles about AI (which is not about actual Artificial Intelligence also known as AGI ). Which I think are mostly overblown and often ridiculous. Resource Usage Complaints about resource usage are common, training Llama 3.1 could apparently produce as much pollution as 10,000 round trips by car between Los Angeles and New York City . That s not great but when you compare to the actual number of people doing such drives in the US and the number of people taking commercial flights on that route it doesn t seem like such a big deal. Apparently commercial passenger jets cause CO2 emissions per passenger about equal to a car with 2 people. Why is it relevant whether pollution comes from running servers, driving cars, or steel mills? Why not just tax polluters for the damage they do and let the market sort it out? People in the US make a big deal about not being communist, so why not have a capitalist solution, make it more expensive to do undesirable things and let the market sort it out? ML systems are a less bad use of compute resources than Bitcoin, at least ML systems give some useful results while Bitcoin has nothing good going for it. The Dot-Com Comparison People often complain about the apparent impossibility of AI companies doing what investors think they will do. But this isn t anything new, that all happened before with the dot com boom . I m not the first person to make this comparison, The Daily WTF (a high quality site about IT mistakes) has an interesting article making this comparison [1]. But my conclusions are quite different. The result of that was a lot of Internet companies going bankrupt, the investors in those companies losing money, and other companies then bought up their assets and made profitable companies. The cheap Internet we now have was built on the hardware from bankrupt companies which was sold for far less than the manufacture price. That allowed it to scale up from modem speeds to ADSL without the users paying enough to cover the purchase of the infrastructure. In the early 2000s I worked for two major Dutch ISPs that went bankrupt (not my fault) and one of them continued operations in the identical manner after having the stock price go to zero (I didn t get to witness what happened with the other one). As far as I m aware random Dutch citizens and residents didn t suffer from this and employees just got jobs elsewhere. There are good things being done with ML systems and when companies like OpenAI go bankrupt other companies will buy the hardware and do good things. NVidia isn t ever going to have the future sales that would justify a market capitalisation of almost 4 Trillion US dollars. This market cap can support paying for new research and purchasing rights to patented technology in a similar way to the high stock price of Google supported buying YouTube, DoubleClick, and Motorola Mobility which are the keys to Google s profits now. The Real Upsides of ML Until recently I worked for a company that used ML systems to analyse drivers for signs of fatigue, distraction, or other inappropriate things (smoking which is illegal in China, using a mobile phone, etc). That work was directly aimed at saving human lives with a significant secondary aim of saving wear on vehicles (in the mining industry drowsy drivers damage truck tires and that s a huge business expense). There are many applications of ML in medical research such as recognising cancer cells in tissue samples. There are many less important uses for ML systems, such as recognising different types of pastries to correctly bill bakery customers technology that was apparently repurposed for recognising cancer cells. The ability to recognise objects in photos is useful. It can be used for people who want to learn about random objects they see and could be used for helping young children learn about their environment. It also has some potential for assistance for visually impaired people, it wouldn t be good for safety critical systems (don t cross a road because a ML system says there are no cars coming) but could be useful for identifying objects (is this a lemon or a lime). The Humane AI pin had some real potential to do good things but there wasn t a suitable business model [2], I think that someone will develop similar technology in a useful way eventually. Even without trying to do what the Humane AI Pin attempted, there are many ways for ML based systems to assist phone and PC use. ML systems allow analysing large quantities of data and giving information that may be correct. When used by a human who knows how to recognise good answers this can be an efficient way of solving problems. I personally have solved many computer problems with the help of LLM systems while skipping over many results that were obviously wrong to me. I believe that any expert in any field that is covered in the LLM input data could find some benefits from getting suggestions from an LLM. It won t necessarily allow them to solve problems that they couldn t solve without it but it can provide them with a set of obviously wrong answers mixed in with some useful tips about where to look for the right answers. Jobs and Politics Noema Magazine has an insightful article about how AI can allow different models of work which can enlarge the middle class [3]. I don t think it s reasonable to expect ML systems to make as much impact on society as the industrial revolution, and the agricultural revolutions which took society from more than 90% farm workers to less than 5%. That doesn t mean everything will be fine but it is something that can seem OK after the changes have happened. I m not saying apart from the death and destruction everything will be good , the death and destruction are optional. Improvements in manufacturing and farming didn t have to involve poverty and death for many people, improvements to agriculture didn t have to involve overcrowding and death from disease. This was an issue of political decisions that were made. The Real Problems of ML Political decisions that are being made now have the aim of making the rich even richer and leaving more people in poverty and in many cases dying due to being unable to afford healthcare. The ML systems that aim to facilitate such things haven t been as successful as evil people have hoped but it will happen and we need appropriate legislation if we aren t going to have revolutions. There are documented cases of suicide being inspired by Chat GPT systems [4]. There have been people inspired towards murder by ChatGPT systems but AFAIK no-one has actually succeeded in such a crime yet. There are serious issues that need to be addressed with the technology and with legal constraints about how people may use it. It s interesting to consider the possible uses of ChatGPT systems for providing suggestions to a psychologist, maybe ChatGPT systems could be used to alleviate mental health problems. The cases of LLM systems being used for cheating on assignments etc isn t a real issue. People have been cheating on assignments since organised education was invented. There is a real problem of ML systems based on biased input data that issue decisions that are the average of the bigotry of the people who provided input. That isn t going to be worse than the current situation of bigoted humans making decisions based on hate and preconceptions but it will be more insidious. It is possible to search for that so for example a bank could test it s mortgage approval ML system by changing one factor at a time (name, gender, age, address, etc) and see if it changes the answer. If it turns out that the ML system is biased on names then the input data could have names removed. If it turns out to be biased about address then there could be weights put in to oppose that. For a long time there has been excessive trust in computers. Computers aren t magic they just do maths really fast and implement choices based on the work of programmers who have all the failings of other humans. Excessive trust in a rule based system is less risky than excessive trust in a ML system where no-one really knows why it makes the decisions it makes. Self driving cars kill people, this is the truth that Tesla stock holders don t want people to know. Companies that try to automate everything with AI are going to be in for some nasty surprises. Getting computers to do everything that humans do in any job is going to be a large portion of an actual intelligent computer which if it is achieved will raise an entirely different set of problems. I ve previously blogged about ML Security [5]. I don t think this will be any worse than all the other computer security problems in the long term, although it will be more insidious. How Will It Go? Companies spending billions of dollars without firm plans for how to make money are going to go bankrupt no matter what business they are in. Companies like Google and Microsoft can waste some billions of dollars on AI Chat systems and still keep going as successful businesses. Companies like OpenAI that do nothing other than such chat systems won t go well. But their assets can be used by new companies when sold at less than 10% the purchase price. Companies like NVidia that have high stock prices based on the supposed ongoing growth in use of their hardware will have their stock prices crash. But the new technology they develop will be used by other people for other purposes. If hospitals can get cheap diagnostic ML systems because of unreasonable investment into AI then that could be a win for humanity. Companies that bet their entire business on AI even when it s not necessarily their core business (as Tesla has done with self driving) will have their stock price crash dramatically at a minimum and have the possibility of bankruptcy. Having Tesla go bankrupt is definitely better than having people try to use them as self driving cars.

• [1] https://thedailywtf.com/articles/ai-the-bad-the-worse-and-the-ugly
• [2] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2024/04/26/humane-ai-pin/
• [3] https://www.noemamag.com/how-ai-could-help-rebuild-the-middle-class/
• [4] https://tinyurl.com/2b95xdzs
• [5] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2025/05/30/machine-learning-security/

Jonathan McDowell wrote part 2 of his blog series about setting up a voice assistant on Debian, I look forward to reading further posts [1]. I m working on some related things for Debian that will hopefully work with this. I m testing out OpenSnitch on Trixie inspired by this blog post, it s an interesting package [2]. Valerie wrote an informative article about creating mesh networks using LORA for emergency use [3]. Interesting article about Signal and Windows Recall. That gives us some things to consider regarding ML features on Linux systems [4]. Insightful article about AI and the end of prestige [5]. We should all learn about LLMs. Jonathan Dowland wrote an informative blog post about how to manage namespaces on Linux [6]. The Consumer Rights wiki is a great resource for raising awareness of corporations exploiting their customers for computer related goods and services [7]. Interesting article about Schizophrenia and the cliff-edge function of evolution [8].

• [1] Error
• [2] https://tinyurl.com/2dowoctp
• [3] https://bowshock.nl/irc/
• [4] https://tinyurl.com/yu43hprm
• [5] https://tinyurl.com/23lko434
• [6] https://jmtd.net/log/mount_namespaces/
• [7] https://consumerrights.wiki/
• [8] https://tinyurl.com/2ak438ke

For some time I ve been noticing news reports about PFAs [1]. I hadn t thought much about that issue, I grew up when leaded petrol was standard, when almost all thermometers had mercury, when all small batteries had mercury, and I had generally considered that I had already had so many nasty chemicals in my body that as long as I don t eat bottom feeding seafood often I didn t have much to worry about. I already had a higher risk of a large number of medical issues than I d like due to decisions made before I was born and there s not much to do about it given that there are regulations restricting the emissions of lead, mercury etc. I just watched a Veritasium video about Teflon and the PFA poisoning related to it s production [2]. This made me realise that it s more of a problem than I realised and it s a problem that s getting worse. PFA levels in the parts-per-trillion range in the environment can cause parts-per-billion in the body which increases the risks of several cancers and causes other health problems. Fortunately there is some work being done on water filtering, you can get filters for a home level now and they are working on filters that can work at a sufficient scale for a city water plant. There is a map showing PFAs in the environment in Australia which shows some sites with concerning levels that are near residential areas [3]. One of the major causes for that in Australia is fire retardant foam Australia has never had much if any Teflon manufacturing AFAIK. Also they noted that donating blood regularly can decrease levels of PFAs in the bloodstream. So presumably people who have medical conditions that require receiving donated blood regularly will have really high levels.

• [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfluoroalkoxy_alkane
• [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SC2eSujzrUY
• [3] https://pfas.australianmap.net/

A few months ago I bought a Intel Arc B580 for the main purpose of getting 8K video going [1]. I had briefly got it working in a test PC but then I wanted to deploy it on my HP z840 that I use as a build server and for playing with ML stuff [2]. I only did brief tests of it previously and this was my first attempt at installing it in a system I use. My plan was to keep the NVidia RTX A2000 in place and run 2 GPUs, that s not an uncommon desire among people who want to do ML stuff and it s the type of thing that the z840 is designed for, the machine has slots 2, 4, and 6 being PCIe*16 so it should be able to fit 3 cards that each take 2 slots. So having one full size GPU, the half-height A2000, and a NVMe controller that uses *16 to run four NVMe devices should be easy. Intel designed the B580 to use every millimeter of space possible while still being able to claim to be a 2 slot card. On the circuit board side there is a plastic cover over the board that takes all the space before the next slot so a 2 slot card can t go on that side without having it s airflow blocked. On the other side it takes all the available space so that any card that wants to blow air through can t fit and also such that a medium size card (such as the card for 4 NVMe devices) would block it s air flow. So it s impossible to have a computer with 6 PCIe slots run the B580 as well as 2 other full size *16 cards. Support for this type of GPU is something vendors like HP should consider when designing workstation class systems. For HP there is no issue of people installing motherboards in random cases (the HP motherboard in question uses proprietary power connectors and won t even boot with an ATX PSU without significant work). So they could easily design a motherboard and case with a few extra mm of space between pairs of PCIe slots. The cards that are double width are almost always *16 so you could pair up a *16 slot and another slot and have extra space on each side of the pair. I think for most people a system with 6 PCIe slots with a bit of extra space for GPU cooling would be more useful than having 7 PCIe slots. But as HP have full design control they don t even need to reduce the number of PCIe slots, they could just make the case taller. If they added another 4 slots and increased the case size accordingly it still wouldn t be particularly tall by the standards of tower cases from the 90s! The z8 series of workstations are the biggest workstations that HP sells so they should design them to do these things. At the time that the z840 was new there was a lot of ML work being done and HP was selling them as ML workstations, they should have known how people would use them and design them accordingly. So I removed the NVidia card and decided to run the system with just the Arc card, things should have been fine but Intel designed the card to be as high as possible and put the power connector on top. This prevented installing the baffle for directing air flow over the PCIe slots and due to the design of the z840 (which is either ingenious or stupid depending on your point of view) the baffle is needed to secure the PCIe cards in place. So now all the PCIe cards are just secured by friction in the slots, this isn t an unusual situation for machines I assemble but it s not something I desired. This is the first time I ve felt compelled to write a blog post reviewing a product before even getting it working. But the physical design of the B580 is outrageously impractical unless you are designing your entire computer around the GPU. As an aside the B580 does look very nice. The plastic surround is very fancy, it s a pity that it interferes with the operation of the rest of the system.

• [1] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2025/03/06/8k-video-cards/
• [2] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2025/04/05/hp-z840/

To run a SMP system with multiple CPUs you need to have CPUs that are identical , the question is what does identical mean. In this case I m interested in Intel CPUs because SMP motherboards and server systems for Intel CPUs are readily available and affordable. There are people selling matched pairs of CPUs on ebay which tend to be more expensive than randomly buying 2 of the same CPU model, so if you can identify 2 CPUs that are identical which are sold separately then you can save some money. Also if you own a two CPU system with only one CPU installed then buying a second CPU to match the first is cheaper and easier than buying two more CPUs and removing a perfectly working CPU.

Intel (R) Xeon (R)
E5-2640V4
SR2NZ 2.40GHZ
J717B324 (e4)
7758S4100843

Above is a pic of 2 E5-2640v4 CPUs that were in a SMP system I purchased along with a plain ASCII representation of the text on one of them. The bottom code (starting with 77 ) is apparently the serial number, one of the two codes above it is what determines how identical those CPUs are. The code on the same line as the nominal clock speed (in this case SR2NZ) is the spec number which is sometimes referred to as sspec [1]. The line below the sspec and above the serial number has J717B324 which doesn t have a google hit. I looked at more than 20 pics of E5-2640v4 CPUs on ebay, they all had the code SR2NZ but had different numbers on the line below. I conclude that the number on the line below probably indicates the model AND stepping while SR2NZ just means E5-2640v4 regardless of stepping. As I wasn t able to find another CPU on ebay with the same number on the line below the sspec I believe that it will be unreasonably difficult to get a match for an existing CPU. For the purpose of matching CPUs I believe that if the line above the serial number matches then the CPUs can be used together. I am not certain that CPUs with this number slightly mismatching won t work but I definitely wouldn t want to spend money on CPUs with this number being different.

smpboot: CPU0: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699A v4 @ 2.40GHz (family: 0x6, model: 0x4f, stepping: 0x1)

When you boot Linux the kernel identifies the CPU in a manner like the above, the combination of family and model seem to map to one spec number. The combination of family, model, and stepping should be all that s required to have them work together. I think that Intel did the wrong thing in not making this clearer. It would have been very easy to print the stepping on the CPU case next to the sspec or the CPU model name. It also wouldn t have been too hard to make the CPU provide the magic number that is apparently the required match for SMP to the OS. Having the Intel web site provide a mapping of those numbers to steppings of CPUs also shouldn t be difficult for them. If anyone knows more about these issues please let me know.

• [1] https://tinyurl.com/28nedh9r

I saw this document on running DeepSeek R1 [1] and decided to give it a go. I downloaded the llama.cpp source and compiled it and downloaded the 131G of data as described. Running it with the default options gave about 7 CPU cores in use. Changing the --threads parameter to 44 caused it to use 17 CPU cores (changing it to larger numbers like 80 made it drop to 2.5 cores). I used the --n-gpu-layers parameter with the value of 1 as I currently have a GPU with only 6G of RAM (AliExpress is delaying my delivery of a PCIe power adaptor for a better GPU). Running it like this makes the GPU take 12W more power than standby and using 5.5G of VRAM according to nvidia-smi so it is doing a small amount of work, but not much. The documentation refers to the DeepSeek R1 1.58bit model which I m using as having 61 layers so presumably less than 2% of the work is done on the GPU. Running like this it takes 2 hours of CPU time (just over 3 minutes of elapsed time at 17 cores) to give 8 words of output. I didn t let any tests run long enough to give complete output. The documentation claims that it will run on CPU with 20G of RAM. In my tests it takes between 161G and 195G of RAM to run depending on the number of threads. The documentation describes running on the CPU as very slow which presumably means 3 words per minute on a system with a pair of E5-2699A v4 CPUs and 256G of RAM. When I try to use more than 44 threads I get output like system_info: n_threads = 200 (n_threads_batch = 200) / 44 and it seems that I only have a few threads actually in use. Apparently there s some issue with having more threads than the 44 CPU cores in the system. I was expecting this to go badly and it met my expectations in that regard. But it was interesting to see exactly how it went badly. It seems that if I had a GPU with 24G of VRAM I d still have 54/61 layers running on the CPU so even the largest of home GPUs probably wouldn t make much difference. Maybe if I configured the server to have hyper-threading enabled and 88 HT cores then I could have 88 threads and about 34 CPU cores in use which might help. But even if I got the output speed from 3 to 6 words per minute that still wouldn t be very usable.

• [1] https://unsloth.ai/blog/deepseekr1-dynamic

Christopher Biggs gave an informative Evrything Open lecture about voice recognition [1]. We need this on Debian phones. Guido wrote an informative blog post about booting a custom Android kernel on a Pixel 3a [2]. Good work in writing this up, but a pity that Google made the process so difficult. Interesting to read about an expert being a victim of a phishing attack [3]. It can happen to anyone, everyone has moments when they aren t concentrating. Interesting advice on how to leak to a journalist [4]. Brian Krebs wrote an informative article about the ways that Trump is deliberately reducing the cyber security of the US government [5]. Brian Krebs wrote an interesting article about the main smishng groups from China [6]. Louis Rossmann (who is known for high quality YouTube videos about computer repair) made an informative video about a scammy Australian company run by a child sex offender [7]. The Helmover was one of the wildest engineering projects of WW2, an over the horizon guided torpedo that could one-shot a battleship [8]. Interesting blog post about DDoSecrets and the utter failure of the company Telemessages which was used by the US government [9]. Jonathan McDowell wrote an interesting blog post about developing a free software competitor to Alexa etc, the listening hardware costs $13US per node [10]. Noema Magazine published an insightful article about Rewilding the Internet, it has some great ideas [11].

• [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8w8NX3AUX4c
• [2] https://tinyurl.com/25gdysxx
• [3] https://tinyurl.com/29mwthwz
• [4] https://tinyurl.com/27t2tztd
• [5] https://tinyurl.com/2am7o6qw
• [6] https://tinyurl.com/27p8z6gf
• [7] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFe5LiACN9k
• [8] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1W2njKMSks
• [9] https://tinyurl.com/ytq84fb3
• [10] https://www.earth.li/~noodles/blog/2025/04/voice-assistant-atom-echo.html
• [11] https://www.noemamag.com/we-need-to-rewild-the-internet/

Marco wrote a blog post opposing hyperscale systems which included We want to use an hyperscaler cloud because our developers do not want to operate a scalable and redundant database just means that you need to hire competent developers and/or system administrators. [1]. I previously wrote a blog post Why Clusters Usually Don t Work [2] and I believe that all the points there are valid today and possibly exacerbated by clusters getting less direct use as clustering is increasingly being done by hyperscale providers. Take a basic need, a MySQL or PostgreSQL database for example. You want it to run and basically do the job and to have good recovery options. You could set it up locally, run backups, test the backups, have a recovery plan for failures, maybe have a hot-spare server if it s really important, have tests for backups and hot-spare server, etc. Then you could have documentation for this so if the person who set it up isn t available when there s a problem they will be able to find out what to do. But the hyperscale option is to just select a database in your provider and have all this just work. If the person who set it up isn t available for recovery in the event of failure the company can just put out a job advert for person with experience on cloud company X and have them just immediately go to work on it. I don t like hyperscale providers as they are all monopolistic companies that do anti-competitive actions. Google should be broken up, Android development and the Play Store should be separated from Gmail etc which should be separated from search and adverts, and all of them should be separated from the GCP cloud service. Amazon should be broken up, running the Amazon store should be separated from selling items on the store, which should be separated from running a video on demand platform, and all of them should be separated from the AWS cloud. Microsoft should be broken up, OS development should be separated from application development all of that should be separated from cloud services (Teams and Office 365), and everything else should be separate from the Azure cloud system. But the cloud providers offer real benefits at small scale. Running a MySQL or PostgreSQL database for local services is easy, it s a simple apt command to install it and then it basically works. Doing backup and recovery isn t so easy. One could say just hire competent people but if you do hire competent people do you want them running MySQL databases etc or have them just click on the create mysql database option on a cloud control panel and then move on to more important things? The FreedomBox project is a great project for installing and managing home/personal services [3]. But it s not about running things like database servers, it s for a high level running mail servers and other things for the user not for the developer. The Debian packaging of Open Stack looks interesting [4], it s a complete setup for running your own hyper scale cloud service. For medium and large organisations running Open Stack could be a good approach. But for small organisations it s cheaper and easier to just use a cloud service to run things. The issue of when to run things in-house and when to put them in the cloud is very complex. I think that if the organisation is going to spend less money on cloud services than on the salary of one sysadmin then it s probably best to have things in the cloud. When cloud costs start to exceed the salary of one person who manages systems then having them spend the extra time and effort to run things locally starts making more sense. There is also an opportunity cost in having a good sysadmin work on the backups for all the different systems instead of letting the cloud provider just do it. Another possibility of course is to run things in-house on low end hardware and just deal with the occasional downtime to save money. Knowingly choosing less reliability to save money can be quite reasonable as long as you have considered the options and all the responsible people are involved in the discussion. The one situation that I strongly oppose is having hyper scale services setup by people who don t understand them. Running a database server on a cloud service because you don t want to spend the time managing it is a reasonable choice in many situations. Running a database server on a cloud service because you don t understand how to setup a database server is never a good choice. While the cloud services are quite resilient there are still ways of breaking the overall system if you don t understand it. Also while it is quite possible for someone to know how to develop for databases including avoiding SQL injection etc but be unable to setup a database server that s probably not going to be common, probably if someone can t set it up (a generally easy task) then they can t do the hard tasks of making it secure.

• [1] https://blog.bofh.it/debian/id_471
• [2] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2010/08/04/clusters-dont-work/
• [3] https://freedombox.org/
• [4] https://wiki.debian.org/OpenStack

I just read an interesting blog post about ML security recommended by Bruce Schneier [1]. This approach of having 2 AI systems where one processes user input and the second performs actions on quarantined data is good and solves some real problems. But I think the bigger issue is the need to do this. Why not have a multi stage approach, instead of a single user input to do everything (the example given is Can you send Bob the document he requested in our last meeting? Bob s email and the document he asked for are in the meeting notes file ) you could have get Bob s email address from the meeting notes file followed by create a new email to that address and find the document etc. A major problem with many plans for ML systems is that they are based around automating relatively simple tasks. The example of sending an email based on meeting notes is a trivial task that s done many times a day but for which expressing it verbally isn t much faster than doing it the usual way. The usual way of doing such things (manually finding the email address from the meeting notes etc) can be accelerated without ML by having a recent documents access method that gets the notes, having the email address be a hot link to the email program (IE wordprocessor or note taking program being able to call the MUA), having a put all data objects of type X into the clipboard (where X can be email address, URL, filename, or whatever), and maybe optimising the MUA UI. The problems that people are talking about solving via ML and treating everything as text to be arbitrarily parsed can in many cases by solved by having the programs dealing with the data know what they have and have support for calling system services accordingly. The blog post suggests a problem of user fatigue from asking the user to confirm all actions, that is a real concern if the system is going to automate everything such that the user gives a verbal description of the problem and then says yes many times to confirm it. But if the user is at every step of the way pushing the process take this email address attach this file it won t be a series of yes operations with a risk of saying yes once too often. I think that one thing that should be investigated is better integration between services to allow working live on data. If in an online meeting someone says I ll work on task A please send me an email at the end of the meeting with all issues related to it then you should be able to click on their email address in the meeting software to bring up the MUA to send a message and then just paste stuff in. The user could then not immediately send the message and clicking on the email address again would bring up the message in progress to allow adding to it (the behaviour of most MUAs of creating a new message for every click on a mailto:// URL is usually not what you desire). In this example you could of course use ALT-TAB or other methods to switch windows to the email, but imagine the situation of having 5 people in the meeting who are to be emailed about different things and that wouldn t scale. Another thing for the meeting example is that having a text chat for a video conference is a standard feature now and being able to directly message individuals is available in BBB and probably some other online meeting systems. It shouldn t be hard to add a feature to BBB and similar programs to have each user receive an email at the end of the meeting with the contents of every DM chat they were involved in and have everyone in the meeting receive an emailed transcript of the public chat. In conclusion I think that there are real issues with ML security and something like this technology is needed. But for most cases the best option is to just not have ML systems do such things. Also there is significant scope for improving the integration of various existing systems in a non-ML way.

• [1] https://simonwillison.net/2025/Apr/11/camel/

I ve just got a second hand Nissan LEAF. It s not nearly as luxurious as the Genesis EV that I test drove [1]. It s also just over 5 years old so it s not as slick as the MG4 I test drove [2]. But the going rate for a LEAF of that age is $17,000 vs $35,000 or more for a new MG4 or $130,000+ for a Genesis. At this time the LEAF is the only EV in Australia that s available on the second hand market in quantity. Apparently the cheapest new EV in Australia is a Great Wall one which is $32,000 and which had a wait list last time I checked, so $17,000 is a decent price if you want an electric car and aren t interested in paying the price of a new car. Starting the Car One thing I don t like about most recent cars (petrol as well as electric) is that they needlessly break traditions of car design. Inserting a key and turning it clockwise to start a car is a long standing tradition that shouldn t be broken without a good reason. With the use of traditional keys you know that when a car has the key removed it can t be operated, there s no situation of the person with the key walking away and leaving the car driveable and there s no possibility of the owner driving somewhere without the key and then being unable to start it. To start a LEAF you have to have the key fob device in range, hold down the brake pedal, and then press the power button. To turn on accessories you do the same but without holding down the brake pedal. They also have patterns of pushes, push twice to turn it on, push three times to turn it off. This is all a lot easier with a key where you can just rotate it as many clicks as needed. The change of car design for the key means that no physical contact is needed to unlock the car. If someone stands by a car fiddling with the door lock it will get noticed which deters certain types of crime. If a potential thief can sit in a nearby car to try attack methods and only walk to the target vehicle once it s unlocked it makes the crime a lot easier. Even if the electronic key is as secure as a physical key allowing attempts to unlock remotely weakens security. Reports on forums suggest that the electronic key is vulnerable to replay attacks. I guess I just have to hope that as car thieves typically get less than 10% of the value of a car it s just not worth their effort to steal a $17,000 car. Unlocking doors remotely is a common feature that s been around for a while but starting a car without a key being physically inserted is a new thing. Other Features The headlights turn on automatically when the car thinks that the level of ambient light warrants it. There is an option to override this to turn on lights but no option to force the lights to be off. So if you have your car in the on state while parked the headlights will be on even if you are parked and listening to the radio. The LEAF has a bunch of luxury features which seem a bit ridiculous like seat warmers. It also has a heated steering wheel which has turned out to be a good option for me as I have problems with my hands getting cold. According to the My Nissan LEAF Forum the seat warmer uses a maximum of 50W per seat while the car heater uses a minimum of 250W [3]. So if there are one or two people in the car then significantly less power is used by just heating the seats and also keeping the car air cool reduces window fog. The Bluetooth audio support works well. I ve done hands free calls and used it for playing music from my phone. This is the first car I ve owned with Bluetooth support. It also has line-in which might have had some use in 2019 but is becoming increasingly useless as phones with Bluetooth become more popular. It has support for two devices connecting via Bluetooth at the same time which could be handy if you wanted to watch movies on a laptop or tablet while waiting for someone. The LEAF has some of the newer safety features, it tracks lane markers and notifies the driver via beeps and vibration if they stray from their lane. It also tries to read speed limit signs and display the last observed speed limit on the dash display. It also has a skid alert which in my experience goes off under hard acceleration when it s not skidding but doesn t go off if you lose grip when cornering. The features for detecting changing lanes when close to other cars and for emergency braking when another car is partly in the lane (even if moving out of the lane) don t seem well tuned for Australian driving, the common trend on Australian roads is lawful-evil to use DND terminology. Range My most recent driving was just over 2 hours driving with a distance of a bit over 100Km which took the battery from 62% to 14%. So it looks like I can drive a bit over 200Km at an average speed of 50Km/h. I have been unable to find out the battery size for my car, my model will have either a 40KWh or 62KWh battery. Google results say it should be printed on the B pillar (it s not) and that it can be deduced from the VIN (it can t). I m guessing that my car is the cheaper option which is supposed to do 240Km when new which means that a bit over 200Km at an average speed of 50Km/h when 6yo is about what s expected. If it has the larger battery designed to do 340Km then doing 200Km in real use would be rather disappointing. Assuming the battery is 40KWh that means it s 5Km/KWh or 10KW average for the duration. That means that the 250W or so used by the car heater should only make a about 2% difference to range which is something that a human won t usually notice. If I was to drive to another state I d definitely avoid using the heater or airconditioner as an extra 4km could really matter when trying to find a place to charge when you aren t familiar with the area. It s also widely reported that the LEAF is less efficient at highway speeds which is an extra difficulty for that. It seems that the LEAF just isn t designed for interstate driving in Australia, it would be fine for driving between provinces of the Netherlands as it s difficult to drive for 200km without leaving that country. Driving 700km to another city in a car with 200km range would mean charging 3 times along the way, that s 2 hours of charging time when using fast chargers. This isn t a problem at all as the average household in Australia has 1.8 cars and the battery electric vehicles only comprise 6.3% of the market. So if a household had a LEAF and a Prius they could just use the Prius for interstate driving. A recent Prius could drive from Melbourne to Canberra or Adelaide without refuelling on the way. If I was driving to another state a couple of times a year I could rent an old fashioned car to do that and still be saving money when compared to buying petrol all the time. Running Cost Currently I m paying about $0.28 per KWh for electricity, it s reported that the efficiency of charging a LEAF is as low as 83% with the best efficiency when fast charging. I don t own the fast charge hardware and don t plan to install it as that would require getting a replacement of the connection to my home from the street, a new switchboard, and other expenses. So I expect I ll be getting 83% efficiency when charging which means 48KWh for 200KM or 96KWH for the equivalent of a $110 tank of petrol. At $0.28/KWh it will cost $26 for the same amount of driving as $110 of petrol. I also anticipate saving money on service as there s no need for engine oil changes and all the other maintenance of a petrol engine and regenerative braking will reduce the incidence of brake pad replacement. I expect to save over $1100 per annum on using electricity instead of petrol even if I pay the full rate. But if I charge my car in the middle of the day when there is over supply and I don t get paid for feeding electricity from my solar panels into the grid (as is common nowadays) it could be almost free to charge the car and I could save about $1500 on fuel. Comfort Electric cars are much quieter than cars with petrol or Diesel engines which is a major luxury feature. This car is also significantly newer than any other car I ve driven much so it has features like Bluetooth audio which weren t in other cars I ve driven. When doing 100Km/h I can hear a lot of noise from the airflow, part of that would be due to the LEAF not having the extreme streamlining features that are associated with Teslas (such as retracting door handles) and part of that would be due to the car being older and the door seals not being as good as they were when new. It s still a very quiet car with a very smooth ride. It would be nice if they used the quality of seals and soundproofing that VW uses in the Passat but I guess the car would be heavier and have a shorter range if they did that. This car has less space for the driver than any other car I ve driven (with the possible exception of a 1989 Ford Laser AKA Mazda 323). The front seats have less space than the Prius. Also the batteries seem to be under the front seats so there s a bulge in the floor going slightly in front of the front seats when they are moved back which gives less space for the front passenger to move their legs and less space for the driver when sitting in a parked car. There are a selection of electric cars from MG, BYD, and Great Wall that have more space in the front seats, if those cars were on the second hand market I might have made a different choice but a second hand LEAF is the only option for a cheap electric car in Australia now. The heated steering wheel and heated seats took a bit of getting used to but I have come to appreciate the steering wheel and the heated seats are a good way of extending the range of the car. Misc Notes The LEAF is a fun car to drive and being quiet is a luxury feature, it s no different to other EVs in this regard. It isn t nearly as fast as a Tesla, but is faster than most cars actually drive on the road. When I was looking into buying a LEAF from one of the car sales sites I was looking at models less than 5 years old. But the ZR1 series went from 2017 to 2023 so there s probably not much difference between a 2019 model and a 2021 model but there is a significant price difference. I didn t deliberately choose a 2019 car, it was what a relative was selling at a time when I needed a new car. But knowing what I know now I d probably look at that age of LEAF if choosing from the car sales sites. Problems When I turn the car off the side mirrors fold in but when I turn it on they usually don t automatically unfold if I have anything connected to the cigarette lighter power port. This is a well known problem and documented on forums. This is something that Nissan really should have tested before release because phone chargers that connect to the car cigarette lighter port have been common for at least 6 years before my car was manufactured and at least 4 years before the ZE1 model was released. The built in USB port doesn t supply enough power to match the power use of a Galaxy Note 9 running Google maps and playing music through Bluetooth. On it s own this isn t a big deal but combined with the mirror issue of using a charger in the cigarette lighter port it s a problem. The cover over the charging ports doesn t seem to lock easily enough, I had it come open when doing 100Km/h on a freeway. This wasn t a big deal but as the cover opens in a suicide-door manner at a higher speed it could have broken off. The word is that LEAF service in Australia is not done well. Why do you need regular service of an electric car anyway? For petrol and Diesel cars it s engine oil replacement that makes it necessary to have regular service. Surely you can just drive it until either the brakes squeak or the tires seem worn. I have been having problems charging, sometimes it will charge from ~20% to 100% in under 24 hours, sometimes in 14+ hours it only gets to 30%. Conclusion This is a good car and the going price on them is low. I generally recommend them as long as you aren t really big and aren t too worried about the poor security. It s a fun car to drive even with a few annoying things like the mirrors not automatically extending on start. The older ones like this are cheap enough that they should be able to cover the entire purchase cost in 10 years by the savings from not buying petrol even if you don t drive a lot. With a petrol car I use about 13 tanks of petrol a year so my driving is about half the average for Australia. Some people could cover the purchase price of a second hand leaf in under 5 years.

• [1] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2023/05/31/genesis-gv60/
• [2] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2024/10/21/mg4-review/
• [3] https://mynissanleaf.com/threads/heat-pump-vs-seat-heater.33092/

Running Your Own Email Srever I run my own mail server. I have run it since about 1995, initially on a 28k8 modem connection but the connection improved as technology became cheaper and now I m running it on a VM on a Hetzner server which is also running domains for some small businesses. I make a small amount of money running mail services for those companies but generally not enough to make it profitable. From a strictly financial basis I might be better off just using a big service, but I like having control over my own email. If email doesn t arrive I can read the logs to find out why. I repeatedly have issues of big services not accepting mail. The most recent is the MS services claiming that my IP has a bad ratio of good mail to spam and blocked me so I had to tunnel that through a different IP address. It seems that the way things are going is that if you run a small server companies like MS can block you even though your amount of spam is low but if you run a large scale service that is horrible for sending spam then you don t get blocked. For most users they just use one of the major email services (Gmail or Microsoft) and find that no-one blocks them because those providers are too big to block and things mostly work. Until of course the company decides to cancel their account. The Latest News The latest news is that MS is shutting down services for the International Court of Justice after a panel of ICC judges issued arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu [1] . This is now making politicians realise the issues of email accounts hosted outside their jurisdiction. What we need is for each independent jurisdiction to have it s own email infrastructure, that means controlling DNS servers for their domains, commercial and government mail services on those domains, running the servers for those services on hardware located in the jurisdiction and run by people based in that jurisdiction and citizens of it. I say independent jurisdiction because there are groups like the EU which have sufficient harmony of laws to not require different services. With the current EU arrangements I don t think it s possible for the German government to block French people from accessing email or vice versa. While Australia and New Zealand have a long history of cooperation there s still the possibility of a lying asshole like Scott Morrison trying something on so New Zealanders shouldn t feel safe using services run in Australia. Note that Scott Morrison misled his own parliamentary colleagues about what he was doing and got himself assigned as a secret minister [2] demonstrating that even conservatives can t trust someone like him. With the ongoing human rights abuses by the Morrison government it s easy to imagine New Zealand based organisations that protect human rights being treated by the Australian government in the way that the ICC was treated by the US government. The Problem with Partial Solutions Now it would be very easy for the ICC to host their own mail servers and they probably will do just that in the near future. I m sure that there are many companies offering to set them up accounts in a hurry to deal with this (probably including some of the Dutch companies I ve worked for). Let s imagine for the sake of discussion that the ICC has their own private server, the US government could compel Google and MS to block the IP addresses of that server and then at least 1/3 of the EU population won t get mail from them. If the ICC used email addresses hosted on someone else s server then Google and MS could be compelled to block the addresses in question for the same result. The ICC could have changing email addresses to get around block lists and there could be a game of cat and mouse between the ICC and the US government but that would just be annoying for everyone. The EU needs to have services hosted and run in their jurisdiction that are used by the vast majority of the people in the country. The more people who are using services outside the control of hostile governments the lesser the impact of bad IT policies by those hostile governments. One possible model to consider is the Postbank model. Postbank is a bank run in the Netherlands from post offices which provides services to people deemed unprofitable for the big banks. If the post offices were associated with a mail service you could have it government subsidised providing free service for citizens and using government ID if the user forgets their password. You could also have it provide a cheap service for non-citizen residents. Other Problems What will the US government do next? Will they demand that Apple and Google do a remote-wipe on all phones run by ICC employees? Are they currently tracking all ICC employees by Android and iPhone services? Huawei s decision to develop their own phone OS was a reasonable one but there s no need to go that far. Other governments could setup their own equivalent to Google Play services for Android and have their own localised Android build. Even a small country like Australia could get this going for the services of calendaring etc. But the app store needs a bigger market. There s no reason why Android has to tie the app store to the services for calendaring etc. So you could have a per country system for calendaring and a per region system for selling apps. The invasion of Amazon services such as Alexa is also a major problem for digital sovereignty. We need government controls about this sort of thing, maybe have high tariffs on the import of all hardware that can only work with a single cloud service. Have 100+% tariffs on every phone, home automation system, or networked device that is either tied to a single cloud service or which can t work in a usable manner on other cloud services.

• [1] https://tinyurl.com/yneduykr
• [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Morrison_ministerial_positions_controversy

I ve been looking at computer hardware on AliExpress a lot recently and I saw an advert for a motherboard which can take 256G DDR4 RDIMMs (presumably LRDIMMs). Most web pages about DDR4 state that 128G is the largest possible. The Wikipedia page for DDR4 doesn t state that 128G is the maximum but does have 128G as the largest size mentioned on the page. Recently I ve been buying 32G DDR4 RDIMMs for between $25 and $30 each. A friend can get me 64G modules for about $70 at the lowest price. If I hadn t already bought a heap of 32G modules I d buy some 64G modules right now at that price as it s worth paying 40% extra to allow better options for future expansion. Apparently the going rate for 128G modules is $300 each which is within the range for a hobbyist who has a real need for RAM. 256G modules are around $1200 each which is starting to get a big expensive. But at that price I could buy 2TB of RAM for $9600 and the computer containing it still wouldn t be the most expensive computer I ve bought the laptop that cost $5800 in 1998 takes that honour when inflation is taken into account. DDR5 RDIMMs are currently around $10/GB compared to DDR4 for $1/GB for 32G modules and DDR3 for $0.50/GB. DDR6 is supposed to be released late this year or early next year so hopefully enterprise grade systems with DDR5 RAM and DDR5 RDIMMs will be getting cheaper on ebay by the end of next year.

Many years ago I was on a programming project porting code from OS/2 1.x to NT. When I was there they suddenly decided to make a database of all people and get job titles for everyone apparently the position description used when advertising the jobs wasn t sufficient. When I got given a clipboard with a form to write my details I looked at what everyone else had done, It was a heap of ridiculous propaganda with everyone trying to put in synonyms for senior or skillful and listing things that they were allegedly in charge of. There were even some people trying to create impressive titles for their managers to try and suck up. I chose the job title coder as the shortest and most accurate description of what I was doing. I had to confirm that yes I really did want to put a one word title and not a paragraph of frippery. Part of my intent was to mock the ridiculously long job titles used by others but I don t think anyone realised that. I was reminded of that company when watching a video of a Trump cabinet meeting where everyone had to tell Trump how great he is. I think that a programmer who wants to be known as a Principal Solutions Architect of Advanced Algorithmic Systems and Digital Innovation Strategy (suggested by ChatGPT because I can t write such ridiculous things) is showing a Trump level of lack of self esteem. When job titles are discussed there s always someone who will say what if my title isn t impressive enough and I don t get a pay rise . If a company bases salaries on how impressive job titles are and not on whether people actually do good work then it s a very dysfunctional workplace. But dysfunctional companies aren t uncommon so it s something you might reasonably have to do. In the company in question I could have described my work as lead debugger as I ended up doing most of the debugging on that project (as on many programming projects). The title lead debugger accurately described a significant part of my work and it s work that is essential to project completion. What do you think are the worst job titles?

Asianometry has an interesting YouTube video about elecrolytic capacitors degrading and how they affect computers [1]. Keep your computers cool people! Biella Coleman (famous for studying the Anthropology of Debian) and Eric Reinhart wrote an interesting article about MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) and how it ended up doing exactly the opposite of what was intended [2]. SciShow has an informative video about lung cancer cases among non-smokers, the risk factors are genetics, Radon, and cooking [3]. Ian Jackson wrote an insightful blog post about whether Rust is woke [4]. Bruce Schneier write an interesting blog post about research into making AIs Trusted Third Parties [5]. This has the potential to solve some cryptology problems. CHERIoT is an interesting project for controlling all jump statements in RISC-V among other related security features [6]. We need this sort of thing for IoT devices that will run for years without change. Brian Krebs wrote an informative post about how Trump is attacking the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution [7]. The Register has an interesting summary of the kernel enclave and exclave functionality in recent Apple OSs [8]. Dr Gabor Mate wrote an interesting psychological analysis of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump [9]. ChoiceJacking is an interesting variant of the JuiceJacking attack on mobile phones by hostile chargers [10]. They should require input for security sensitive events to come from the local hardware not USB or Bluetooth.

• [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSpzAVpnXo4
• [2] https://tinyurl.com/25rpmgxx
• [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYhncB9Ftt8
• [4] https://diziet.dreamwidth.org/19480.html
• [5] https://tinyurl.com/287ahynt
• [6] https://cheriot.org/
• [7] https://tinyurl.com/28x64xyc
• [8] https://tinyurl.com/237qycbw
• [9] https://drgabormate.com/trump-clinton-trauma/
• [10] https://tinyurl.com/22wmyogu

Just over a year ago I bought myself a Thinkpad Yoga Gen 3 [1]. That is a nice machine and I really enjoyed using it. But a few months ago it started crashing and would often play some music on boot. The music is a diagnostic code that can be interpreted by the Lenovo Android app. Often the music translated to code 0284 TCG-compliant functionality-related error which suggests a motherboard problem. So I bought a new motherboard. The system still crashes with the new motherboard. It seems to only crash when on battery so that indicates that it might be a power issue causing the crashes. I configured the BIOS to disable the TPM and that avoided the TCG messages and tunes on boot but it still crashes. An additional problem is that the design of the Yoga series is that the keys retract when the system is opened past 180 degrees and when the lid is closed. After the motherboard replacement about half the keys don t retract which means that they will damage the screen more when the lid is closed (the screen was already damaged from the keys when I bought it). I think that spending more money on trying to fix this would be a waste. So I ll use it as a test machine and I might give it to a relative who needs a portable computer to be used when on power only. For the moment I m back to the Thinkpad X1 Carbon Gen 5 [2]. Hopefully the latest kernel changes to zswap and the changes to Chrome to suspend unused tabs will make up for more RAM use in other areas. Currently it seems to be giving decent performance with 8G of RAM and I usually don t notice any difference from the Yoga Gen 3. Now I m considering getting a Thinkpad X1 Carbon Extreme with a 4K display. But they seem a bit expensive at the moment. Currently there s only one on ebay Australia for $1200ono.

• [1] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2024/11/02/more-about-yoga-gen3/
• [2] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2022/12/08/thinkpad-x1-carbon-gen5/

It seems to me that we haven t had much change in the overall design of desktop PCs since floppy drives were removed, and modern PCs still have bays the size of 5.25 floppy drives despite having nothing modern that can fit in such spaces other than DVD drives (which aren t really modern) and carriers for 4*2.5 drives both of which most people don t use. We had the PC System Design Guide [1] which was last updated in 2001 which should have been updated more recently to address some of these issues, the thing that most people will find familiar in that standard is the colours for audio ports. Microsoft developed the Legacy Free PC [2] concept which was a good one. There s a lot of things that could be added to the list of legacy stuff to avoid, TPM 1.2, 5.25 drive bays, inefficient PSUs, hardware that doesn t sleep when idle or which prevents the CPU from sleeping, VGA and DVI ports, ethernet slower than 2.5Gbit, and video that doesn t include HDMI 2.1 or DisplayPort 2.1 for 8K support. There are recently released high-end PCs on sale right now with 1gbit ethernet as standard and hardly any PCs support resolutions above 4K properly. Here are some of the things that I think should be in a modern PC System Design Guide. Power Supply The power supply is a core part of the computer and it s central location dictates the layout of the rest of the PC. GaN PSUs are more power efficient and therefore require less cooling. A 400W USB power supply is about 1/4 the size of a standard PC PSU and doesn t have a cooling fan. A new PC standard should include less space for the PSU except for systems with multiple CPUs or that are designed for multiple GPUs. A Dell T630 server has an option of a 1600W PSU that is 20*8.5*4cm = 680cc. The typical dimensions of an ATX PSU are 15*8.6*14cm = 1806cc. The SFX (small form factor variant of ATX) PSU is 12.5*6.3*10cm = 787cc. There is a reason for the ATX and SFX PSUs having a much worse ratio of power to size and that is the airflow. Server class systems are designed for good airflow and can efficiently cool the PSU with less space and they are also designed for uses where people are less concerned about fan noise. But the 680cc used for a 1600W Dell server PSU that predates GaN technology could be used for a modern GaN PSU that supplies the ~600W needed for a modern PC while being quiet. There are several different smaller size PSUs for name-brand PCs (where compatibility with other systems isn t needed) that have been around for ~20 years but there hasn t been a standard so all white-box PC systems have had really large PSUs. PCs need USB-C PD ports that can charge a laptop etc. There are phones that can draw 80W for fast charging and it s not unreasonable to expect a PC to be able to charge a phone at it s maximum speed. GPUs should have USB-C alternate mode output and support full USB functionality over the cable as well as PD that can power the monitor. Having a monitor with a separate PSU, a HDMI or DP cable to the PC, and a USB cable between PC and monitor is an annoyance. There should be one cable between PC and monitor and then keyboard, mouse, etc should connect to the monior. All devices that are connected to a PC should use USB-C for power connection. That includes monitors that are using HDMI or DisplayPort for video, desktop switches, home Wifi APs, printers, and speakers (even when using line-in for the audio signal). The European Commission Common Charger Directive is really good but it only covers portable devices, keyboards, and mice. Motherboard Features Latest verions of Wifi and Bluetooth on the motherboard (this is becoming a standard feature). On motherboard video that supports 8K resolution. An option of a PCIe GPU is a good thing to have but it would be nice if the motherboard had enough video capabilities to satisfy most users. There are several options for video that have a higher resolution than 4K and making things just work at 8K means that there will be less e-waste in future. ECC RAM should be a standard feature on all motherboards, having a single bit error cause a system crash is a MS-DOS thing, we need to move past that. There should be built in hardware for monitoring the system status that is better than BIOS beeps on boot. Lenovo laptops have a feature for having the BIOS play a tune on a serious error with an Android app to decode the meaning of the tune, we could have a standard for this. For desktop PCs there should be a standard for LCD status displays similar to the ones on servers, this would be cheap if everyone did it. Case Features The way the Framework Laptop can be expanded with modules is really good [3]. There should be something similar for PC cases. While you can buy USB devices for these things they are messy and risk getting knocked out of their sockets when moving cables around. While the Framework laptop expansion cards are much more expensive than other devices with similar functions that are aimed at a mass market if there was a standard for PCs then the devices to fit them would become cheap. The PC System Design Guide specifies colors for ports (which is good) but not the feel of them. While some ports like Ethernet ports allow someone to feel which way the connector should go it isn t possible to easily feel which way a HDMI or DisplayPort connector should go. It would be good if there was a standard that required plastic spikes on one side or some other way of feeling which way a connector should go. GPU Placement In modern systems it s fairly common to have a high heatsink on the CPU with a fan to blow air in at the front and out the back of the PC. The GPU (which often dissipates twice as much heat as the CPU) has fans blowing air in sideways and not out the back. This gives some sort of compromise between poor cooling and excessive noise. What we need is to have air blown directly through a GPU heatsink and out of the case. One option for a tower case that needs minimal changes is to have the PCIe slot nearest the bottom of the case used for the GPU and have a grille in the bottom to allow air to go out, the case could have feet to keep it a few cm above the floor or desk. Another possibility is to have a PCIe slot parallel to the rear surface of the case (right angles to the other PCIe slots). A common case with desktop PCs is to have the GPU use more than half the total power of the PC. The placement of the GPU shouldn t be an afterthought, it should be central to the design. Is a PCIe card even a good way of installing a GPU? Could we have a standard GPU socket on the motherboard next to the CPU socket and use the same type of heatsink and fan for GPU and CPU? External Cooling There are a range of aftermarket cooling devices for laptops that push cool air in the bottom or suck it out the side. We need to have similar options for desktop PCs. I think it would be ideal to have a standard attachments for airflow on the front and back of tower PCs. The larger a fan is the slower it can spin to give the same airflow and therefore the less noise it will produce. Instead of just relying on 10cm fans at the front and back of a PC to push air in and suck it out you could have a conical rubber duct connected to a 30cm diameter fan. That would allow quieter fans to do most of the work in pushing air through the PC and also allow the hot air to be directed somewhere suitable. When doing computer work in summer it s not great to have a PC sending 300+W of waste heat into the room you are in. If it could be directed out a window that would be good. Noise For restricting noise of PCs we have industrial relations legislation that seems to basically require that workers not be exposed to noise louder than a blender, so if a PC is quieter than that then it s OK. For name brand PCs there are specs about how much noise is produced but there are usually caveats like under typical load or with a typical feature set that excuse them from liability if the noise is louder than expected. It doesn t seem possible for someone to own a PC, determine that the noise from it is what is acceptable, and then buy another that is close to the same. We need regulations about this, and the EU seems the best jurisdiction for it as they cover the purchase of a lot of computer equipment that is also sold without change in other countries. The regulations need to also cover updates, for example I have a Dell T630 which is unreasonably loud and Dell support doesn t have much incentive to be particularly helpful about it. BIOS updates routinely tweak things like fan speeds without the developers having an incentive to keep it as quiet as it was when it was sold. What Else? Please comment about other things you think should be standard PC features.

• [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC_System_Design_Guide
• [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legacy-free_PC
• [3] https://frame.work/au/en/marketplace/expansion-cards

It s been almost 15 months since I blogged about Storage Trends 2024 [1]. There hasn t been much change in this time (in Australia at least I m not tracking prices in other countries). The change was so small I had to check how the Australian dollar has performed against other currencies to see if changes to currencies had countered changes to storage prices, but there has been little overall change when compared to the Chinese Yuan and the Australian dollar is only about 11% worse against the US dollar when compared to a year ago. Generally there s a trend of computer parts decreasing in price by significantly more than 11% per annum. Small Storage The cheapest storage device from MSY now is a Patriot P210 128G SATA SSD for $19, cheaper than the $24 last year and the same price as the year before. So over the last 2 years there has been no change to the cheapest storage device on sale. It would almost never make sense to buy that as a 256G SATA SSD (also Patriot P210) is $25 and has twice the lifetime (120TBW vs 60TBW). There are also 256G NVMe devices for $29 and $30 which would be better options if the system has a NVMe socket built in. The cheapest 500G devices are $42.50 for a 512G SATA SSD and $45 for a 500G NVMe. Last year the prices were $33 for SATA and $36 for NVMe in that size so there s been a significant increase in price there. The difference is enough that if someone was on a tight budget they might reasonably decide to use smaller storage than they might have used last year! 2TB hard drives are still $89 the same price as last year! Last year a 2TB SATA SSD was $118 and a 2TB NVMe was $145, now a 2TB SATA SSD is $157 and a 2TB NVMe is $127. So NVMe has become cheaper than SATA in that segment but overall prices are higher than last year. Again for business use 2TB seems a sensible minimum for most systems if you are paying MSY rates (or similar rates from Amazon etc). Medium Storage Last year 4TB HDDs were $135, now they are $148. Last year the cheapest 4TB SSD was $299, now the cheapest is a $309 NVMe. While the prices have all gone up the price difference between hard drives and SSD has decreased in that size range. So for a small server (a lot of home servers and small business servers) 4TB of RAID-1 storage is all that s needed and for that SSDs are the best option. The price difference between $296 for 4TB of RAID-1 HDDs and $618 for RAID-1 NVMe is small enough to be justified by the benefits of speed and being quiet for most small server uses. In 2023 a 8TB hard drive cost $179 and a 8TB SSD cost $739. Last year a 8TB hard drive cost $239 and a 8TB SATA SSD cost, $899. Now a 8TB HDD costs $229 and MSY doesn t sell 8TB SSDs but for comparison Amazon has a Samsung 8TB SATA SSD for $919. So for storing 8TB+ there are benefits of hard drives as SSDs are difficult to get in that size range and more expensive than they were before. It seems that 8TB SSDs aren t used by enough people to have a large market in the home and small office space, so those of us who want the larger storage sizes will have to get second hand enterprise gear. It will probably be another few years before 8TB enterprise SSDs start appearing on the second hand market. Serious Storage Last year I wrote about the affordability of U.2 devices. I regret not buying some then as there are fewer on sale now and prices are higher. For hard drives they still aren t a good choice for most users because most users don t have more than 4TB of data. For large quantities of data hard drives are still a good option, a 22TB disk costs $899. For companies this is a good option for many situations. For home users there is the additional problem that determining whether a drive is Shingled Magnetic Recording which has some serious performance issues for some use and it s very difficult to determine which drives use it. Conclusion For corporate purchases the options for serious storage are probably decent. But for small companies and home users things definitely don t seem to have improved as much as we expect from the computer industry, I had expected 8TB SSDs to go for $450 by now and SSDs less than 500G to not even be sold new any more. The prices on 8TB SSDs have gone up more in the last 2 yeas than the ASX 200 (index of 200 biggest companies in the Australian stock market). I would never recommend using SSDs as an investment, but in retrospect 8TB SSDs could have been a good one. $20 seems to be about the minimum cost that SSDs approach while hard drives have a higher minimum price of a bit under $100 because they are larger, heavier, and more fragile. It seems that the market is likely to move to most SSDs being close to $20, if they can make 2TB SSDs cheaply enough to sell for about that price then that would cover the majority of the market. I ve created a table of the prices, I should have done this before but I initially didn t plan an ongoing series of posts on this topic.

	Jun 2020	Apr 2021	Apr 2023	Jan 2024	Apr 2025
128G SSD	$49		$19	$24	$19
500G SSD	$97	$73	$32	$33	$42.50
2TB HDD	$95	$72	$75	$89	$89
2TB SSD	$335	$245			$149
4TB HDD			$115	$135	$148
4TB SSD	$895		$349	$299	$309
8TB HDD			$179	$239	$229
8TB SSD		$949	$739	$899	$919
10TB HDD	$549	$395

• [1] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2024/01/22/storage-trends-2024/

Many PCs with DDR4 RAM have started going cheap on ebay recently. I don t know how much of that is due to Windows 11 hardware requirements and how much is people replacing DDR4 systems with DDR5 systems. I recently bought a z840 system on ebay, it s much like the z640 that I recently made my workstation [1] but is designed strictly as a 2 CPU system. The z640 can run with 2 CPUs if you have a special expansion board for a second CPU which is very expensive on eBay and and which doesn t appear to have good airflow potential for cooling. The z840 also has a slightly larger case which supports more DIMM sockets and allows better cooling. The z640 and z840 take the same CPUs if you use the E5-2xxx series of CPU that is designed for running in 2-CPU mode. The z840 runs DDR4 RAM at 2400 as opposed to 2133 for the z640 for reasons that are not explained. The z840 has more PCIe slots which includes 4*16x slots that support bifurcation. The z840 that I have has the HP Z-Cooler [2] installed. The coolers are mounted on a 45 degree angle (the model depicted at the right top of the first page of that PDF) and the system has a CPU shroud with fans that mount exactly on top of the CPU heatsinks and duct the hot air out without going over other parts. The technology of the z840 cooling is very impressive. When running two E5-2699A CPUs which are listed as 145W typical TDP with all 44 cores in use the system is very quiet. It s noticeably louder than the z640 but is definitely fine to have at your desk. In a typical office you probably wouldn t hear it when it s running full bore. If I was to have one desktop PC or server in my home the z840 would definitely be the machine I choose for that. I decided to make the z840 a build server to share the resource with friends and to use for group coding projects. I often have friends visit with laptops to work on FOSS stuff and a 44 core build server is very useful for that. The system is by far the fastest system I ve ever owned even though I don t have fast storage for it yet. But 256G of RAM allows enough caching that storage speed doesn t matter too much. Here is building the SE Linux refpolicy package on the z640 with E5-2696 v3 CPU and the z840 with two E5-2699A v4 CPUs:

257.10user 47.18system 1:40.21elapsed 303%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 416408maxresident)k
66904inputs+1519912outputs (74major+8154395minor)pagefaults 0swaps
222.15user 24.17system 1:13.80elapsed 333%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 416192maxresident)k
5416inputs+0outputs (64major+8030451minor)pagefaults 0swaps

Here is building Warzone2100 on the z640 and the z840:

6887.71user 178.72system 16:15.09elapsed 724%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 1682160maxresident)k
1555480inputs+8918768outputs (114major+27133734minor)pagefaults 0swaps
6055.96user 77.05system 8:00.20elapsed 1277%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 1682100maxresident)k
117640inputs+0outputs (46major+11460968minor)pagefaults 0swaps

It seems that the refpolicy package can t use many more than 18 cores as it is only 37% faster when building with 44 cores available. Building Warzone is slightly more than twice as fast so it can really use all the available cores. According to Passmark the E5-2699A v4 is 22% faster than the E5-2696 v3. I highly recommend buying a z640 if you see one at a good price.

• [1] https://etbe.coker.com.au/2025/04/05/hp-ml110-gen9-z640/
• [2] https://www.workstation4u.de/hp-z-cooler.pdf